Windows Vista Server 2008 Questions:

im pretty curious about windows server 2008. seeing as they have a 240 day evaluation period and i reformat my hard drive more frequently than that, windows server 2008 might be my next windows OS of choice. I actually already own a copy of windows vista, and, well, i decided to use the dvd as a coaster. seriously. (don't worry i still have the key)

so, my questions are this: is windows server 2008 basically a cleaner, more robust version of windows vista? that sounds just wonderful. i would like a non-bloated version of vista to remain up to date without having the buggy mess to deal with.

if windows server 2008 is essentially windows vista, can i use drivers intended for vista on windows server and expect it to work perfectly?

also, is the UI for windows server command line, or is that just an optional thing?

 

I don't know too much, but... this looks like a decent overview:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Server_2008

I *think* typical Windows desktop apps should work fine on Server, but I'm not sure about games and stuff.

I assume it uses Vista drivers (since they're basically from the same codebase, and it would be a pain for mfrs. to write new drivers) but I'm not certain.

I didn't know about the 240 day evaluation though... that's pretty cool.

 

Well, they are based on the same kernel. I think it should be more stable and reliable, like XP and 2003.

The big plus imo, is that when you install it, there is nothing on it. On the "Server Manager", there is "feature manager" and you can add what you want. Such as

Windows Desktop Experiance: WMP, photo gallery....
Wireless LAN support
Ressource Management....

Customizable as a Linux install, but once you are in the OS. Here's a little guide: http://www.pronetworks.org/forum/about101245.html

It uses the same drivers as Vista, but the auto installer might not recognise the OS so for some of them you do it with the device manager andi t works well. The only thing not working is my blue tooth adapter but I don't use it anyway.

IE7 is also defaulted on "High" level security, and you can only use High or Custom. Not a big problem once you customised it though.

File Transfer seems more consistant (always stays at 16MB/S rather tham oving from 1.5-19MB/S ).

If gaming performances were your major point against Vista, well, they are the same here.

 

You would not want to install server OS on the computer for everyday use especilly server 2008. Yes, server 2008 shares the same kernel with Vista, but they are different beast. Server 2008 requires more resources than Vista. It is typical of server OS anyway.

No, server 2008 isn't lean OS, and I don't see why you want to use it for everyday task. UI for Server 2008 is optional installtion if you want the server to perform just certain task and nothing else such as DNS or DHCP. It has very limited function though.

I don't understand why people think Vista is bloat? It is the future OS and it runs more services on the background than XP.

 

I'm getting 820MB of RAM used, 600MB of page file & 58 processes, about the same thing as 32bits Vista.
I'm running the 32 bits one btw.


I got it because I had a urge to test lol. Also, it is a way smaller download than the Vista SP1 RTM.

Also, sincei t's meant for server, I guess it shouldn't need to be rebooted each 2-3 days max, but one time a month or so no?

 

I don't reboot Vista every 2-3 days, nor do I see any reason to do that. I only reboot for Windows updates, system crashes (which I'm hoping SP1 will fix), and software installs that require a reboot. It ends up being about once a week or so on average. I use sleep or hibernate the rest of the time.

Anyway, be sure to check out the other Windows Server 2008 thread in this forum too... the big one.

 

First the title of the thread is wrong and second it's as good as Vista, probably better. You can use it as a desktop OS (like me).